in article Xns94C8D1D84C6A728762153tmichanet@news-60.giganews.com, Demetrius
Zeluff at 28762153@tmicha.net wrote on 04/11/2004 12:38 PM:
>
> Artist Mike ... His posts are filtered because he's a spammer.
>
Got any evidence of that?
Likes: 0
in article Xns94C8D1D84C6A728762153tmichanet@news-60.giganews.com, Demetrius
Zeluff at 28762153@tmicha.net wrote on 04/11/2004 12:38 PM:
>
> Artist Mike ... His posts are filtered because he's a spammer.
>
Got any evidence of that?
AlwaysCorrect <AlwaysCorrect@AC.com> writes:
> in article 107j7dulgtab2a1@news.supernews.com, Anthony Edwards at
> usenet@catfish.nildram.co.uk wrote on 04/11/2004 12:34 PM:
>
>> On Sun, 11 Apr 2004 20:23:59 +0200, Willem <gaatjenietaan@notvalid> wrote:
>>
>>> What Mike wants is not my issue. My issue is if Supernews
>>> blocks customers on false evidence or personal matters with
>>> staff.
>>
>> Supernews doesn't, and never has done.
>
>
> Well, they did it with Mike.
>
If you aren't Mike, why were you spamming his url, Mike?
--
Rebecca Ore
http://mysite.verizon.net/rebecca.ore
all the evidence these people need is that you post something in an art
group they do not think is art, so they call it spam. No brains needed to
sort that out I think. If you don't like it, kill file it, but blocking
someone on the fact that someone else posts under his name is nonsense.
The policy of supernews seems to be don't investigate, just block. And if
you complain about us we will block you as well.
LP
"AlwaysCorrect" <AlwaysCorrect@AC.com> wrote in message
news:BC9F3355.F32FA%AlwaysCorrect@AC.com...
> in article Xns94C8D1D84C6A728762153tmichanet@news-60.giganews.com,
Demetrius
> Zeluff at 28762153@tmicha.net wrote on 04/11/2004 12:38 PM:
>
>
> >
> > Artist Mike ... His posts are filtered because he's a spammer.
> >
>
>
> Got any evidence of that?
>
in article 107jqhc5ginls12@corp.supernews.com, Lord Pander at
noway@mailinator.com wrote on 04/11/2004 5:52 PM:
> all the evidence these people need is that you post something in an art
> group they do not think is art, so they call it spam. No brains needed to
> sort that out I think. If you don't like it, kill file it, but blocking
> someone on the fact that someone else posts under his name is nonsense.
> The policy of supernews seems to be don't investigate, just block. And if
> you complain about us we will block you as well.
> LP
Censors like to work in the dark, bigots like to work in the dark. Bring
them into the light and they squeak and squeal like little mice with their
tails stuck on a trap.
Supernews blocks people based upon fake messages. Blocks people based upon
made up "policy" that is made to fit the moment.
Supernews blocks people just because they don't like your "behavior" in a
newsgroup.
I have learned all this from reading this thread.
That and more.
Dave.
"Jackie" <jsnow6@belsouth.net> wrote in message
news:BC9F4AF3.F3335%jsnow6@belsouth.net...
> in article 107jqhc5ginls12@corp.supernews.com, Lord Pander at
> noway@mailinator.com wrote on 04/11/2004 5:52 PM:
>
> > all the evidence these people need is that you post something in an art
> > group they do not think is art, so they call it spam. No brains needed
to
> > sort that out I think. If you don't like it, kill file it, but blocking
> > someone on the fact that someone else posts under his name is nonsense.
> > The policy of supernews seems to be don't investigate, just block. And
if
> > you complain about us we will block you as well.
> > LP
>
>
> Censors like to work in the dark, bigots like to work in the dark. Bring
> them into the light and they squeak and squeal like little mice with their
> tails stuck on a trap.
>
> Supernews blocks people based upon fake messages. Blocks people based
upon
> made up "policy" that is made to fit the moment.
>
> Supernews blocks people just because they don't like your "behavior" in a
> newsgroup.
>
> I have learned all this from reading this thread.
>
>
"Mike..." <mike@artistmike.com> wrote in message news:<BC9EF3CF.F329E%mike@artistmike.com>...
> in article 40798d3e$0$85210$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com, Willem at
> gaatjenietaan@notvalid@ac wrote on 04/11/2004 11:23 AM:
>
>
> > What Mike wants is not my issue. My issue is if Supernews
> > blocks customers on false evidence or personal matters with
> > staff. Now that you have called ME a liar twice too, it
> > seems easy to believe blocking will be done if Supernews
> > staff dislikes what their customers write.
>
>
> This is the issue at hand... they have chosen to NOT keep their activities
> private. They have chosen to take little ArtistMike on in a newsgroup and
> now their "policies" are up for public debate. They have chosen to write
> and actually show those policies in action, in a public forum.
>
> Now the door is open ... they can't unring the bell.
>
> ":^) ®
>
> Supernews has written that they make policy upon personal opinions about
> clients. Supernews "does not care" about "ArtistMike" at this point because
> he dares to take his issue to the public in a public forum.
>
> How dare he do that!
>
> If only he would have kissed their ass and behaved like a good little user.
>
> But no... he has to go and have an opinion that does not match up with their
> opinions about spam, about the amount of messages that one person can post,
> his opinions don't match theirs and he has the balls to post his opinions in
> newsgroups ... PUBLIC NEWSGROUPS! How dare he do that?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >
> >> There is absolutely no point in addressing anything
> >> he says.
> >
> > Maybe the addressing is done the wrong way. The more I read
> > about all this, the more I think the only way of addressing
> > this is to lift the block.
>
>
> They can't do that. They can't. They have to "save face"... they can't be
> seen as backing down to a nobody like "ArtistMike".
>
> They are stuck. They have no place to go. They can either battle it out in
> the newsgroups and attempt to "win"... or they can keep their "policy" to
> themselves and slink back under the rock they were under.
There is no face to save. Supernews have done the right thing, and
should be given kudos for it. Christy, your silly head has always
been up your arse, and you keep pretending that your shit doesn't
stink, but it does.
Your paranoid "They" is irrelevant. You have been culled impersonally
by someone in the abuse section.
And don't try and pretend you are just some nobody. You are a nobody
who spams. It is a big difference as far as abuse departments are
concerned.
Are you going to whine for much longer? Are you having fun whining
and making yourself look like someone entirely uneducated and
uncultured. You must be a masochist to put yourself through the
silly loops you spin around in.
in article c4445f56.0404120621.5353109c@posting.google.com, Good Point at
getbaba@fastmail.fm wrote on 04/12/2004 7:21 AM:
> "Mike..." <mike@artistmike.com> wrote in message
> news:<BC9EF3CF.F329E%mike@artistmike.com>...
>> in article 40798d3e$0$85210$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com, Willem at
>> gaatjenietaan@notvalid@ac wrote on 04/11/2004 11:23 AM:
>>
>>
>>> What Mike wants is not my issue. My issue is if Supernews
>>> blocks customers on false evidence or personal matters with
>>> staff. Now that you have called ME a liar twice too, it
>>> seems easy to believe blocking will be done if Supernews
>>> staff dislikes what their customers write.
>>
>>
>> This is the issue at hand... they have chosen to NOT keep their activities
>> private. They have chosen to take little ArtistMike on in a newsgroup and
>> now their "policies" are up for public debate. They have chosen to write
>> and actually show those policies in action, in a public forum.
>>
>> Now the door is open ... they can't unring the bell.
>>
>> ":^) ®
>>
>> Supernews has written that they make policy upon personal opinions about
>> clients. Supernews "does not care" about "ArtistMike" at this point because
>> he dares to take his issue to the public in a public forum.
>>
>> How dare he do that!
>>
>> If only he would have kissed their ass and behaved like a good little user.
>>
>> But no... he has to go and have an opinion that does not match up with their
>> opinions about spam, about the amount of messages that one person can post,
>> his opinions don't match theirs and he has the balls to post his opinions in
>> newsgroups ... PUBLIC NEWSGROUPS! How dare he do that?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>> There is absolutely no point in addressing anything
>>>> he says.
>>>
>>> Maybe the addressing is done the wrong way. The more I read
>>> about all this, the more I think the only way of addressing
>>> this is to lift the block.
>>
>>
>> They can't do that. They can't. They have to "save face"... they can't be
>> seen as backing down to a nobody like "ArtistMike".
>>
>> They are stuck. They have no place to go. They can either battle it out in
>> the newsgroups and attempt to "win"... or they can keep their "policy" to
>> themselves and slink back under the rock they were under.
>
> There is no face to save. Supernews have done the right thing...
Thank you for sharing your opinion.
Now move on.
":^) ®
--
Mike
* Logo Design *
Put some fun in your next logo!
Site at: http://www.artistmike.com
"Mike..." <mike@artistmike.com> wrote in
news:BC9FFA04.F35C6%mike@artistmike.com:
> in article c4445f56.0404120621.5353109c@posting.google.com, Good Point
> at getbaba@fastmail.fm wrote on 04/12/2004 7:21 AM:
>
>> "Mike..." <mike@artistmike.com> wrote in message
>> news:<BC9EF3CF.F329E%mike@artistmike.com>...
>>> in article 40798d3e$0$85210$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com, Willem at
>>> gaatjenietaan@notvalid@ac wrote on 04/11/2004 11:23 AM:
>>>
>>>
>>>> What Mike wants is not my issue. My issue is if Supernews
>>>> blocks customers on false evidence or personal matters with
>>>> staff. Now that you have called ME a liar twice too, it
>>>> seems easy to believe blocking will be done if Supernews
>>>> staff dislikes what their customers write.
>>>
>>>
>>> This is the issue at hand... they have chosen to NOT keep their
>>> activities private. They have chosen to take little ArtistMike on
>>> in a newsgroup and now their "policies" are up for public debate.
>>> They have chosen to write and actually show those policies in
>>> action, in a public forum.
>>>
>>> Now the door is open ... they can't unring the bell.
>>>
>>> ":^) ®
>>>
>>> Supernews has written that they make policy upon personal opinions
>>> about clients. Supernews "does not care" about "ArtistMike" at this
>>> point because he dares to take his issue to the public in a public
>>> forum.
>>>
>>> How dare he do that!
>>>
>>> If only he would have kissed their ass and behaved like a good
>>> little user.
>>>
>>> But no... he has to go and have an opinion that does not match up
>>> with their opinions about spam, about the amount of messages that
>>> one person can post, his opinions don't match theirs and he has the
>>> balls to post his opinions in newsgroups ... PUBLIC NEWSGROUPS! How
>>> dare he do that?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>> There is absolutely no point in addressing anything
>>>>> he says.
>>>>
>>>> Maybe the addressing is done the wrong way. The more I read
>>>> about all this, the more I think the only way of addressing
>>>> this is to lift the block.
>>>
>>>
>>> They can't do that. They can't. They have to "save face"... they
>>> can't be seen as backing down to a nobody like "ArtistMike".
>>>
>>> They are stuck. They have no place to go. They can either battle
>>> it out in the newsgroups and attempt to "win"... or they can keep
>>> their "policy" to themselves and slink back under the rock they were
>>> under.
>>
>> There is no face to save. Supernews have done the right thing...
>
>
> Thank you for sharing your opinion.
>
> Now move on.
>
> ":^) ®
>
>
Thank you for spinning like my personal Top,
Spin On
Quote